urban planning paper

STUDENT ID: 16052664 BENVGBU6: DISASTER RISK REDUCTION IN CITIES

TOPIC TITLE:

POSSIBILITIES AND LIMITATIONS OF URBAN PLANNING IN ADDRESSING

FIRE HAZARD IN CLAN JETTIES, GEORGE TOWN, PENANG, MALAYSIA

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 2

CASE STUDY AREA .................................................................................................................. 2

Spatial and Cultural Context of Study Area ........................................................................... 2

Fire Disasters in George Town WHS ..................................................................................... 3

POSSIBILITIES ......................................................................................................................... 4

Permissible Activities and Non Permissible Activities as Planning and Building Control Tools ....................................................................................................................................... 4

Urban Regeneration Project through Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Initiatives ............. 5

LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 6

Contradictions in Existing Planning Control Guidelines and BOMBA’s Legislations ........... 6

Ad-Hoc and Selective Enforcement on Fire Safety Regulations ............................................ 6

CONCLUSION/OPPORTUNITIES ............................................................................................ 8

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 9

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: The Existing conditions of the Clan Jetties, located in the Buffer Zone of the George Town WHS. It is one of the city's first reclaimed land erected in the late 1880s but remains a “temporary” structured settlement till this day. (JPBD, 2016, p. Annex B: Figure C1) ............ 3

Figure 2: The Planning and Design Guide of the Clan Jetties includes upgrading installations of sewerage and piping infrastructures, as well as a Public Promenade and Pedestrian Walkway as means to introduce green spaces within this settlement. (JPBD, 2016, p. Annex B: Figure C2) .............................................................................................................................. 5

Figure 3: The role of Technical Review Panel in the Planning Permission and Building Plan Application in WHS (JPBD, 2016) ............................................................................................ 7

STUDENT ID: 16052664 BENVGBU6: DISASTER RISK REDUCTION IN CITIES

INTRODUCTION

World heritage sites located within urban areas continue to be subjected to a wide range of

risks. In particular, man-made hazards such as fire hazards leave cultural tangible and

intangible properties vulnerable to direct and indirect damages which may be irreplaceable

due to its underlying outstanding universal values (OUV). Although international

organisations within the cultural heritage and disaster risk management field have converged

to prepare related policy documents1, there is still a lack in academic literatures on how

disaster risk reduction can be streamlined through conservation urban planning to develop

resilience in the context of cultural heritage.

Nations within the South East Asian region acknowledges the risks it is exposed to natural and

man-made hazards, vulnerability to disasters, including the effects of massive urbanisation

and climate change, possibility of conflict of interests, and their potential impact on cultural

heritage. The Hygo Framework for Action (HFA) 2005 – 2015 identifies the mainstreaming of

disaster risks through means of urban planning mechanisms. Johnson (2011) recognises the

shifts in both the focus and metholodogies of mainstreaming risk reductions through urban

planning in recent years, among which include the following; 1) strategic spatial planning to

develop policy frameworks, 2) diversification on addressing development planning issues and

3) recognition in the inclusive approaches that is responsive to the needs of people.

This paper will focus on the advantages and limitations of urban planning in addressing fire

hazards within the informal settlements of the Clan Jetties in George Town UNESCO World

Heritage Site, Penang, Malaysia. This paper also attempts to integrate cultural heritage as a

cross cutting theme to maneuvre opportunities for further researches of urban conservation

planning in disaster risk management.

CASE STUDY AREA

Spatial and Cultural Context of Study Area The Clan Jetties make up a total built-up area of 44,051 square meters, with 573 individual

timber houses built on semi-concrete stilts along the waterfronts of Weld Quay and Beach

Street (JPBD, 2016). As a collective site, they are recognised as Category II, replacement and

1 Other policy documents adopted within the context of cultural heritage includes the Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction at World Heritage Properties (UNESCO, 2007); the Hangzhou Declaration “Placing Culture at the Heart of Sustainable Development Policies” (Hangzhou, 2013); the Recommendations of the International Expert Meeting on Cultural Heritage and Disaster Resilient Communities (Tokyo, 2015); the Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction (Sendai, 2015); the Bonn Declaration (Bonn, 2015); the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (UNGA, 2015); and the Strategy on the Reinforcement of UNESCO’s action for the protection of culture and the promotion of cultural pluralism in the event of armed conflict (UNESCO, 2015).

STUDENT ID: 16052664 BENVGBU6: DISASTER RISK REDUCTION IN CITIES

infill buildings and temporary structures, making up a total of 11% of the total number of

buildings and sites in the WHS area. Figure 1 shows the existing footprints which make up the

Clan Jetties in the WHS.

Figure 1: The Existing conditions of the Clan Jetties, located in the Buffer Zone of the

George Town WHS. It is one of the city's first reclaimed land erected in the late 1880s but

remains a “temporary” structured settlement till this day. (JPBD, 2016, p. Annex B: Figure

C1)

As a living cultural landscape, the Clan Jetties each houses clan member of different Chinese

surname from the villages in Fujian Province, China (Bideau & Kilani, 2009). Currently, there

are seven jetties comprising of the Ong, Lim, Chew, Tan, Lee, Yeoh and mixed surname jetties

within this boundary area (JPBD, 2016). The layout of the settlement is a “fish-bone”

arrangement, with the jetty walkways built of timber planks serving as the major spine for

access for its residents. (Bideau & Kilani, 2009; JPBD, 2016).

Fire Disasters in George Town WHS Records of fire disaster outbreaks in the recent years in the Clan Jetties boundary have been

relatively small-scaled and infrequent in comparison to its vicinity of more formal structured

properties. However, one major fire disaster had occurred in year 2003 involving 53 units of

houses along Noordin Street, one lot adjacent to the now defunct Koay and Peng Aun jetties.

Both clan jetties were later demolished to make way for the State’s mixed development project

in year 2004 (Bideau & Kilani, 2009). Other fire outbreaks include eight category II

shophouses along C.Y.Choy Road, which is also located along the WHS’s buffer zone (News

Straits Time, 2016).

STUDENT ID: 16052664 BENVGBU6: DISASTER RISK REDUCTION IN CITIES

POSSIBILITIES

Permissible Activities and Non Permissible Activities as Planning and Building Control Tools The George Town WHS Special Area Plan (SAP) was recently gazetted as the WHS’s main

strategic action plan in September 2016. The document serves to “guide the promotion of

conservation, preservation, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction in the WHS.”

(JPBD, 2016). Wamsler (2006) identifies the need for risk reduction before, during and after

disasters. Johnson (2011) identifies two distinct disaster risk approaches in addressing built

environment vulnerabilities, mainly the “design” and “location” approach. Thus, the SAP in

this context serves to prevent, mitigate and enable preparedness measures in addressing fire

hazards through conservation spatial planning “design”.

The schedule of permissible activities and non-permissible activities and activity zoning

diagram of SAP, (JPBD, 2016, pp. Figure C2.5, Table C2.1) serve as a specific planning control

tool. The Clan Jetties was assigned its own designated “Jetty Zone”as a residential cluster and

allowable for tourism oriented activities. (JPBD, 2016, p. Figure C2.5). I would argue that

although it may seem that the schedule does not entirely restrict activities which may spike

tourist crowds and along with it the exposure of potentially hazardous activities on the

structures, i.e. food stalls, homestays etc., it is through the location approach in which

mitigations should take place.

Similarly as a building control tool, the SAP provides building adaptive use guidelines to allow

restricted alterations and extensions. These retrofits is not only subjected to fire safety

regulations by the Fire and Rescue Department, but also building and material profile of the

heritage buildings, depending on the hierarchy of significance2. The permitted replacement

of timber structures of both residential houses and wooden walkways allows for the

authenticity of the OUVs to be retained3.

I would assess the design approach of the SAP, Town and Country Planning Act (TCPA), and

Draft Local Plan and other development control instruments as both rational-comprehensive

and realistic considering the requirements by both UNESCO and the National Government to

2 Previous studies on fire risk assessment has been conducted by Mydin, et al., (2014) on inheritance Ancestral Temples and Mansions in the WHS. The selected buildings comprise of Category I and II buildings, which implies stricter restrictions on any considerations on permitted building use but regulates (and sustain) material use based on closest authenticity. 3 Research includes the object or building form, architectural style, typology, traditional materials, history of the object or building and the search for original building plans

STUDENT ID: 16052664 BENVGBU6: DISASTER RISK REDUCTION IN CITIES

be more pro-conservationist than pro-developmentalist as a WHS. The drawback however, is

then reflected upon the enforcement of the plan itself.

Urban Regeneration Project through Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Initiatives

The Clan Jetties, falls under Area C of the SAP’s Planning and Design Guide, as shown in

Figure 24. This PPP collaboration between George Town Development Corporation (GTDC),

the State’s public private development vehicle and Aga Khan Trust for Culture (AKTC) will be

subjected to community engagement and detailed participatory planning process, as well as

provide socio-economic policies aimed at generating employment and raising the living

standards among the residents. (JPBD, 2016)

Figure 2: The Planning and Design Guide of the Clan Jetties includes upgrading

installations of sewerage and piping infrastructures, as well as a Public Promenade and

Pedestrian Walkway as means to introduce green spaces within this settlement. (JPBD,

2016, p. Annex B: Figure C2)

I would assess that this PPP collaboration will significantly reduce underlying fire hazards of

antiquated infrastructures, including water and sanitation pipelines which have pre-dated

back to the early 1950s, its last major upgrading works, mostly by individual lot-by-lot

4 Four Main Priority Areas of the George Town WHS have been identified under the Planning and Design Guide of the SAP, which include: Area A :The North Waterfront, Area B: The East Waterfront – Port, Area C:The Clan Jetties and Area D: Jalan Masjid Kapitan Keling

STUDENT ID: 16052664 BENVGBU6: DISASTER RISK REDUCTION IN CITIES

initiatives (Bideau & Kilani, 2009). This concerted efforts reduce vulnerabilities by upgrading

the spatial and socio-economic environment of the settlement to reduce potential disasters

and address (possibly provoke) land entitlements and ownership status among the Clan Jetties

residents.

LIMITATIONS

Contradictions in Existing Planning Control Guidelines and BOMBA’s5 Legislations The TCPA and National Heritage Act (NHA) are currently being reviewed and amended to

incorporate more specific provisions which mainstreams both conservation and risk

reductions of heritage sites and buildings of the WHS. In the SAP, (JPBD, 2016, pp. B3-26,

B3.5.26), the action statement explicitly calls upon the National Government to amend these

legal stipulations through the Parliament. Until then the existing Fire regulations under the

Uniform Building By Laws (UBBL), which Federal’s BOMBA subscribes to directly contradicts

between the categories of buildings and structures of the Clan Jetties. On one hand, the UBBL

under clause 166, (Government of Malaysia, 1984) states that “every floor space shall be

provided with at least two exits on the basis that if one exit is inoperable, the other exit can

serve the function”. On the other, typical typologies of the majority of building structures in

the Clan Jetties does not subscribe to this requirement, due to its pre-existing interior layout.

To contradict between the SAP’s regulatory framework and the UBBL only means delays or

rejection in planning or building applications for any potential restoration and alteration

works owners in the Clan Jetties may even consider.

Ad-Hoc and Selective Enforcement on Fire Safety Regulations Prior to the gazettement of the SAP in September 2016, the Municipal Council of Penang

Island (MPPP)6 had to rely on non-statutory planning control regulations to deliberate

planning permission and building control applications. To enable councillors to make better

decisions on the niche field of heritage properties, MPPP established a Technical Review Panel

(TRP) to screen development applications for heritage properties within the core and buffer

zones of the WHS. Figure 3 shows the Building Plan and Planning Permission Application

procedures and the role of TRP. This, notwithstanding that the deliberation of these

applications are only a “pre-consultation” stage, and non-statutory based upon administrative

approval of MPPP, according to the requirements of TCPA.

5 BOMBA stands for the Malay abbreviation for the Fire and Rescue Department. 6 MPPP has since been upgraded to City Council status beginning 1 Jan 2015 as known as MBPP (City Council of Penang Island) .

STUDENT ID: 16052664 BENVGBU6: DISASTER RISK REDUCTION IN CITIES

Figure 3: The role of Technical Review Panel in the Planning Permission and Building Plan Application in WHS

(JPBD, 2016)

The biggest criticism among building owners and Principal Submitting Persons (PSP)7 on this

“mitigational move” (Nasution, 2012) was the arising discrepancy in deliberating applications

of heritage properties within WHS, especially when assessing fire regulations. This ad-hoc

decision making process by the supposed TRP, whose Committee comprise of government

official representatives, conservation architects, historians and academics, could not make

effective decisions on the local level. Fire safety regulations on heritage properties had to be

7 PSP refers to qualified submitting professionals who may authorise and submit planning permissions and building plans. They include architects, planners, engineers and land surveyors.

STUDENT ID: 16052664 BENVGBU6: DISASTER RISK REDUCTION IN CITIES

forwarded to the National Heritage Department, a Federal entity adding onto the

interventions of the Local Planning Authority that is MPPP.

Lack of Hazard Information and Outdated Records In recent years, various means of inventories and baseline studies have been carried out by

MPPP, George Town World Heritage Incorporated (GTWHI) and even the State Government

to better inform policies and programmes for the WHS. While there have been previous

inventories for population and land use baseline studies and inventories of religious buildings

previously, there is no available records by MPPP for heritage properties damaged or

destroyed by man-made or natural hazards. More specifically, these inventories have become

obsolete since both of these studies were undertaken in year 2010 and 2012 respectively. In

addition, past records of approved Planning Permission and Building Plans should be

declassified and made available to the public. Dissemination of information on fire hazards

between BOMBA, MPPP and other authorities would empower better reorganisation among

local authorities in reducing fire risk, negotiate alternatives between building owners,

planners, civil society and the public to draw upon consensus on the outcome of mitigating

vulnerability,risks and exposures of fire as a hazard.

CONCLUSION/OPPORTUNITIES

In conclusion, the underlying urban planning principles in the management of addressing

disaster risks for cultural WHS are similar to best practices in conservation management. In

this regard, we need to recognise the need to strengthen the integration between cultural

heritage and disaster risk management sectors. Heritage risk mitigations and assessments of

fire hazards in WHS should be continual through means of maintenance, monitoring and

preparedness to ensure long term resilience of the Clan Jetties in WHS. We also need to

recognise, integrate and mainstream cultural heritage and disaster risk management into land

use management processes to become more equitable, especially when dealing with heritage

sites and buildings like Clan Jetties which predates existing Land codes in addressing fire

hazards. In doing so, we also acknowledge the potential trade-offs in dealing with compliance

of BOMBA while protecting the authenticity (OUVs) of physical structures within the Clan

Jetties. Lastly, there needs to be strong political will and support from the national and local

government, to address upfront the specificities of disaster disk management and culture

heritage towards reframing an effective fire regulations, building effective institutionalisation

and capacities between different actors in urban planning field.

TOTAL WORD COUNT: 2252

STUDENT ID: 16052664 BENVGBU6: DISASTER RISK REDUCTION IN CITIES

REFERENCES

UNESCO, et al., 2016. Recommendations Of The International Expert Meeting On Cultural Heritage And Disaster Resilient Communitiies. Tokyo, Japan, ICCROM, pp. 1-7.

Bideau, F. G. & Kilani, M., 2009. Chinese Clan Jetties of Penang: How Margins are Becoming Part of a World Cultural Heritage. Chinese Southern Diaspora Studies, Volume 3, pp. 144- 166.

Government of Malaysia, 1984. The Uniform Building By Laws (UBBL). Kuala Lumpur: MDC.

Johnson, C., 2011. Urban and Regional Planning and Disaster. In: The Routledge Handbook of Hazards and Disaster Risk Reduction. New York: Routledge Handbooks Online, pp. 641- 651.

JPBD, 2016. George Town World Heritage Site Special Area Plan, George Town: Penang State Government.

Mydin, M. O., Salim, N. A., Sani, N. M. & Khaw, Y., 2014. Evaluation of Imminent Fire Hazards of Inheritance Ancestral Temple and Mansion in Georgetown, Penang. Emerging Technology for Sustainable Development Congress (ETSDC), 3(01030), pp. 1-8.

Nasution, K. S., 2012. George Town, Penang: Managing a Multicultural World Heritage Site. In: F. E. Hutchinson & J. Saravanamuttu, eds. Catching the Wind: Penang in a Rising Asia. 1ST ed. Singapore & Penang: ISEAS Publishing & Penang Institute, pp. 20-27.

News Straits Time, 2016. Fire destroys warehouses, homes in George Town. George Town: The News Straits Time (M) Sdn Bhd.

UNESCO, Dec 2015. Harmonizing Actions to Reduce Cultural Heritage in Asia and the Pacific: Conference Report, France and Bangkok: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and Think City (M) Sdn Bhd.

UNISDR, 2015. Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 - 2030, Switzerland: United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction.

Wamsler, C., 2006. Mainstreaming Risk Reduction In Urban Planning And Housing: A Challenge For International Aid Organisations. Disasters, 30(2), p. 151−177.

View publication statsView publication stats